Another Mass Shooting in the U.S.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by citizenzen, Oct 26, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. citizenzen, Oct 26, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2013

    citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #1
    Considering the number of threads based on the latest shootings in the U.S., I believe it's time that PRSI instituted a new sticky: Another Shooting in the U.S.

    Today it's four people, including a toddler (and according to some sources, two dogs): http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/03/us-arizona-shooting-idUSBRE84205820120503

    But it's bound to be something else in just a few days.

    I propose MacRumor's bundle this endless string of tragic events under one sticky instead of the numerous threads that are now being created over and over and over.
     
  2. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #2
    Can't you just update this thread on a new shooting?

    We could have a separate thread for knife violence
     
  3. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #3
    We certainly could.

    And the shooting death threads would outnumber the stabbing death threads 11,078 to 1,799 (2010).

    http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_us.html

    (actually, that's an oversimplification since multiple shooting deaths are most likely more common than multiple stabbing deaths. But you [may] get the idea.)
     
  4. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #4
    This is so sad, yet the gun nuts will throw around the same pathetic "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument showing that they have no grasp on the severity of the situation.

    Stronger background checks are needed and stricter laws regarding gun ownership. Plain and simple. How is it that mentally ill people can get guns?
     
  5. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #5
    Hope you aren't including suicides in those stats.
     
  6. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #6
    Funny ... people normally seem to hate when suicides get added to gun deaths.

    They flail all around and say ... but, but ... those include suicides!

    But no. In this case my numbers were just homicides.
     
  7. haxrnick macrumors 6502a

    haxrnick

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Location:
    Seattle
    #7
    Am I missing something? GILBERT, Arizona | Wed May 2, 2012 11:54pm EDT
     
  8. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #8
    OMG. You're right!

    In obtaining a link I mistakenly chose a Reuters article that referred to a 2012 Phoenix, Arizona killing of four instead of the Reuters article that referred to a 2013 Phoenix, Arizona killing of four.

    (SLC was right. I am losing my edge.)

    I meant to link to this Reuters news article ...

    That exactly explains why we need a sticky.

    All these incidents kind of blend together.
     
  9. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #9
    Do alcohol and cars kill people?
    If you want a gun they are relatively easy to get. No license or background check required.
     
  10. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #10
    Yes.

    That's the point some of us have been trying to make.

    Time and time again.
     
  11. bassfingers macrumors 6502

    bassfingers

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    #11
    These high profile nutcases are a minority of the gun deaths. The bulk of the tragedy is in suicides and homicides related to criminal activity

    I would say that when you focus on guns as the problem, we ignore the severity of the SOCIAL problem. It feels much nicer and less personal to blame guns. But trying to dissect the cultural issues is much more difficult

    To take suicide as an example, it's much less comfortable to look closely at why people want to kill themselves. I would argue that even without guns, we would have seen a comparable rise in suicides over the same time because the root of the issue is cultural. For violent crime, it's also less comfortable to talk about why this generation of young adults is so okay with killing each other. But, we don't want to talk about the rise of single parent homes or other social issues.

    A good analogy to my point would be America's current obesity problem. It's much nicer to say "oh, McDonald's is to blame because that food is awful for you". But nobody wants to analyze why we have so many apparently terrible parents raising elephant children. I'm not necessarily suggesting that most parents are stuffing their kids with tons of food. There are other ways our social decline could be causing this obesity problem. For example, parents might possibly be creating a stressful environment by fighting in front of their kids. Stress one of the biggest factors in weight gain because it affects metabolism and triggers people to stress eat. However, those issues get overrun with "McDonald's and cafeteria food is bad".

    I do think we have an obvious problem with responsible gun ownership. Firearm accidents are unacceptable and easily avoidable. I also think it's ridiculous how easy it is to illegally obtain a handgun. But I think this question is important:

    Which is scarier:

    a) availability of handguns

    b) an unprecedented number of young adults who seek out those guns with the explicit intention of doing harm with them

    I think answer b is scarier. And I believe solving that problem would be a more efficient way to reduce the number of firearm related deaths. I also think that, so long as B exists, we will have this problem regardless of how available or unavailable guns are
     
  12. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #12
    In a non-incident in Vancouver WA, an 11-year-old arrived at school with some knives, a pistol and 400 rounds of ammo, but was headed off because his mother had called the school to warn them.
    "I have to applaud the parent in regards to getting a handle on this early before something happened," said Deputy Prosecutor Rick Olson.

    Because, you know, managing to prevent your children from getting their hands on your weapons is just not an option :rolleyes:

    And,
    Could the boy's parents be held responsible since police say he took the gun from home? We talked to police and the prosecutor in the case and there is no law in Washington that specifically states a parent can be held accountable for when a kid uses their gun for a crime.
     
  13. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #13
    You're just proving my point that you don't understand the argument. Any idiot can tell you that yes, a person with the gun is the one doing the killing. By fussing over sentence semantics people like you prove that you have absolutely no clue about the real issue at hand which is the wrong people getting ahold of guns.

    I own guns. I keep them in safes. I 100% support stronger background checks, closing buying loopholes, and limiting the types of guns you can buy. I support making it a crime to allow people with a history of mental illness around unsecured guns. Why? Because I'm a safe and responsible gun owner. Guns are made for killing and should be treated as such.

    EDIT: Case in point. My uncle is showing signs of possible dementia. He thinks Obama is the anti-christ, he thinks the world is ending, and (to separate him from just a regular conservative) he is forgetting who people are. My Dad and another uncle went down to see him and buy his guns off of him and get him help. That is being responsible, not things like the case with Sandy Hook where the lady's mentally ill son went shooting guns with her.
     
  14. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #14
    I think Show 'n Tell is getting a little too competitive these days.
     
  15. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #15
    First off, thank you for the very thoughtful post. You did an excellent job of addressing the other side of the issue.

    But what I have to ask you, is why other nations that have focused on guns have done such a better job than the U.S. at reducing gun violence. And why don't you believe that similar measure couldn't work in the U.S.

    We have real world examples of how gun control can work to reduce deaths. Why disregard them in search of some other untried and unproved method?
     
  16. Marble macrumors 6502a

    Marble

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    #16
    I wish this question was asked more often, and not just about gun control. The impulse to ignore those solutions that have not only worked for others, but for a great many others, is bizarre American exceptionalism, and it plagues all our most controversial issues.

    If we could just get over ourselves and acknowledge that strict gun control has worked for the rest of the civilized world, we could direct our fervor to more forward-thinking problems and maybe solve a few before everyone else does, for once.
     
  17. bassfingers macrumors 6502

    bassfingers

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    #17
    I'm all for common sense approaches to reducing the availability of guns. In particular, I think enforcing current laws, and strengthening the background check process make total sense. But I'm skeptical of how much it'll help

    I'm skeptical of how many guns used in violent crimes are obtained legally. These measures would only affect those who obtain a weapon legally and use it illegally. I would bet that most guns in homicides aren't obtained legally

    So, even in the best case scenario where these measure somehow prevent 100% of the bad guys from legally obtaining guns, we're still left with most of the problem(illegally obtained guns). The realistic scenario is that we make a small dent on the small side of the problem. Even then, most of the people we prevented from legally obtaining a weapon are capable of getting their hands on one anyway.

    So, I'm not saying that those measures are bad, they just aren't something I'm going to invest my time in. For example, even though I know house plants will technically absorb CO2, filling my house with house plants is not my solution to reducing CO2 concentrations. But if someone else wants to do it go ahead.

    Also, I think this is a serious issue that's rooted deeply in American culture. Even though I agree with most of these 'common sense measures' I'm hesitant to want anything on this issue to happen out of an emotional reaction. Most of the time, this movement is based on a surge of emotional energy. How well did that serve us with the Patriot Act? That just makes me nervous and causes me to default to the opposition.

    Assuming that we want to tackle the gun problem, my approach would be to focus the vast majority of our energy on eliminating the illegal supply. This would require a serious conversation about border security. Also, people with clean records shouldn't be able to sell guns to criminals etc. the catch though is doing this while keeping government power in check. So long as guns are so illegally available, we have a problem.

    I sincerely believe that my extended family back home in Louisiana, though they all own several guns, are not a part of the problem. In fact, they are all very intense about gun safety training and responsible gun ownership. If all of America were like my family, we'd be a lot safer.

    Oh, and to answer one of your questions, I think America is different from other countries in a few ways:

    1) we are huge and not an island

    2) we apparently have some sort of violence problem that is somehow independent of guns with people who will give more effort to keeping the black market status quo than exists in other countries.

    This is how I think of this: imagine that criminals in France and criminals in the US are pet dogs in two different back yards. France puts up a modest fence. For some reason those dogs look around and say "well crap, okay fine I guess I'll be good and stay put". For some reason I imagine if the US put up a fence, we'd have those crazy dogs that dig up holes under the fence trying desperately to get out and they would never give up
     
  18. lostngone, Oct 26, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2013

    lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #18
    Where is the outrage when this term is used?!!?!?

    If I say gun-grabber this place goes nuts(pun intended). Yet here is another example of bias.
     
  19. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #19
    Frankly, I'd just kind of prefer that all gun-related threads be locked immediately.

    Yes, there is much to be learnt from the (increasing) myriad of spree shootings over the past few years, but all the threads instead descend into a gun rights binary argument, context and subtlety be damned...

    Guns and abortion. Non-starters here in PRSI, I'm afraid...sigh.
     
  20. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #20
    Here are a couple of factors that I believe are key to the problem and should be on your list.

    3) We have the highest number of guns in the hands of private citizens than any other nation, both in raw number and per capita basis. Only Serbia (61.7%) and Yemen (58.1%) have more than half of the amount of guns in private hands as the U.S.

    Other notable countries (% of U.S. guns in private hands) ...

    France 33%
    Canada 32.7%
    Germany 32.1%
    England 6.6%
    Japan 0.6%

    4) We've made this record number of guns available through a huge number of retail and private sources ...
    So while you're talking about how we're more violent as a nation—a claim that is as yet unsubstantiated by any evidence, there have been scientific studies that have looked into the number and availability of gun and that role in gun violence.

    Those studies point to a clear connection: more guns = more gun violence. And it seems to me that would lead to a clear direction to take: reduce the number of guns available in private hands ...
    It seems pretty clear to me that while you can try to improve the psyche of American culture as some kind of long range plan, the first thing we need to do is drastically reduce the number of guns available to the public.

    Other real-world examples shows this works.

    And science agrees.
     
  21. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #21
    You are posting your outrage; therefore, your claim of bias is misplaced.

    Back on topic: Roseville, California, dateline 10/25/2013.

    http://www.sacbee.com/2013/10/25/5852953/us-immigration-officer-shot-in.html
    http://www.sacbee.com/2013/10/26/5855314/roseville-police-describe-night.html

    The TL;DR: parolee, who should not have been able to acquire a gun, acquires a gun, commits assault, attempted carjacking, fleeing police, and at least 6 counts of attempted murder, as he shoots 2 officers, one of those in the jaw, with shrapnel injuring 4 other officers, and goes into a 9 hour standoff.

    And don't even get us talking about a 15 year old boy who shoots and kills his own father, with what may appear to be the father's own gun.

    Don't get me started.

    BL.
     
  22. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #22
    For someone that proclaims they don't care about the term you sure do whinge about it a lot.
     
  23. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    IMO I think in terms of respect for debate it is a term that shouldn't be used.
     
  24. sviato macrumors 68020

    sviato

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Location:
    HR 9038 A
    #24
    Clearly this wouldn't have happened if the dogs had guns and were able to defend themselves - good dogs with guns are the solution!!
     
  25. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #25
    It doesn't bother me, I am just pointing out the hypocrisy.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page